Swedish government trying to pass a draconian Internet wiretap law.

More at
http://muvy.org/new.php?tags=police-state

On Jun 5, 6:05*pm, wrote:
More at
* *http://muvy.org/new.php?tags=police-state

Socialist governments do tend to be more controlling than Capitalist
governments. Goes with the territory. There's much less poverty in
Sweden than in the U.S., but also somewhat less freedom. Not at the
Soviet level, of course, but, the government wants to know what's
going on, and it can pretty much do whatever it wants to find out.
Same as Britain. The British government has been dealing with the IRA
for decades, and now with the threat from the Muslims, they can pretty
much stick a camera and microphone in your bedroom or bathroom anytime
they feel like.

On 6 Juni, 01:35, Jerry Kraus wrote:
On Jun 5, 6:05*pm, wrote:

More at
* *http://muvy.org/new.php?tags=police-state

Socialist governments do tend to be more controlling than Capitalist
governments. *Goes with the territory. *There's much less poverty in
Sweden than in the U.S., but also somewhat less freedom. *Not at the
Soviet level, of course, but, the government wants to know what's
going on, and it can pretty much do whatever it wants to find out.
Same as Britain. *The British government has been dealing with the IRA
for decades, and now with the threat from the Muslims, they can pretty
much stick a camera and microphone in your bedroom or bathroom anytime
they feel like.

Well, the ruling government in Sweden just now consists of a coalition
between the Conservatives, the Liberals, the Agrarian Centrist Party
and the Christian Democratic Party (Conservative).
They are driving for a more "tough on crimes" and we really really
like the USA policy than the previous Green Party and Leftist Party
backed Social Democratic government.
I'm afraid that even the Social Democratic governments during the 50,
60 and 70 did allow the military intelligence service, with the help
of the Social Democratic Unions, to spy on mainly Communists and other
radical leftist elements. However, with the Soviet block only some
hours away, it maybe can be understood,if not excused.
The Cons. and Libs. in power just now are, as always more America
friendly and are keen to help in the hunt for radical islamists. They
also favour greater rights for the police to tap phones, in the hunt
for organised crime. In fact they want the Swedish laws to be more in
line with the American and UK laws in that sense.

D K Palm

On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 16:35:55 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
wrote:

On Jun 5, 6:05=A0pm, wrote:
More at
=A0 =A0http://muvy.org/new.php?tags=3Dpolice-state

Socialist governments do tend to be more controlling than Capitalist
governments. Goes with the territory. There's much less poverty in
Sweden than in the U.S., but also somewhat less freedom. Not at the
Soviet level, of course, but, the government wants to know what's
going on, and it can pretty much do whatever it wants to find out.
Same as Britain. The British government has been dealing with the IRA
for decades, and now with the threat from the Muslims, they can pretty
much stick a camera and microphone in your bedroom or bathroom anytime
they feel like.


Yeah, especially since Sweden doesn't have a socialist government.

John Kulp writes:

Yeah, especially since Sweden doesn't have a socialist government.

That depends on one's point of view.

On 7 Juni, 00:22, Mxsmanic wrote:
John Kulp writes:
Yeah, especially since Sweden doesn't have a socialist government.

That depends on one's point of view.

Det sämsta från bägge läger.......

On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 00:22:20 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

John Kulp writes:

Yeah, especially since Sweden doesn't have a socialist government.

That depends on one's point of view.

It doesn't depend on anything other than facts. The Socialists were
tossed out in the last election.

"John Kulp" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 00:22:20 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

John Kulp writes:

Yeah, especially since Sweden doesn't have a socialist government.

That depends on one's point of view.

It doesn't depend on anything other than facts. The Socialists were
tossed out in the last election.

This doesn't mean that the current one wont follow what M Tatcher (for
example) considers a socialist agenda.

(because they probably will)

tim

On Sat, 7 Jun 2008 15:37:32 +0100, "tims next home"
wrote:


"John Kulp" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 00:22:20 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

John Kulp writes:

Yeah, especially since Sweden doesn't have a socialist government.

That depends on one's point of view.

It doesn't depend on anything other than facts. The Socialists were
tossed out in the last election.

This doesn't mean that the current one wont follow what M Tatcher (for
example) considers a socialist agenda.

(because they probably will)

Which has nothing to do with whether Sweden has a socialist
government. It doesn't.

On Jun 6, 5:53*am, (John Kulp) wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 16:35:55 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus

wrote:
On Jun 5, 6:05=A0pm, wrote:
More at
=A0 =A0http://muvy.org/new.php?tags=3Dpolice-state

Socialist governments do tend to be more controlling than Capitalist
governments. *Goes with the territory. *There's much less poverty in
Sweden than in the U.S., but also somewhat less freedom. *Not at the
Soviet level, of course, but, the government wants to know what's
going on, and it can pretty much do whatever it wants to find out.
Same as Britain. *The British government has been dealing with the IRA
for decades, and now with the threat from the Muslims, they can pretty
much stick a camera and microphone in your bedroom or bathroom anytime
they feel like.

Yeah, especially since Sweden doesn't have a socialist government.

Look, from the standpoint of a Swede, Sweden's government is
Capitalist. From the standpoint of the average American -- who I am
not -- Sweden's government is Communist. I'm just trying to take a
middle line here. Have pity.